Programs & Videos

The "Women in the Life and Law of the D.C. Circuit Courts" Historical Society program, held June 2013 brought together judges, administrators, law clerks, and practicing attorneys, each with direct experience in our courts, to discuss the past, present, and future of women in the Courts of the D.C. Circuit.

On April 12, 2013, 75 students from six D.C. public high schools and two private schools had the unusual opportunity of arguing in the federal courthouse before federal judges in the eighth Mock Court Program sponsored by the Historical Society. Nine judges heard the arguments and selected an outstanding advocate in each of their courtrooms-with each winner receiving a monetary prize from the Society.

During this April 2012 program, University of Pennsylvania professor Stephen J. Morse described the insanity defense as giving legal life to the moral values of fairness and responsibility that the Supreme Court should uphold as a constitutional right.

A ruling in the mid 1950's by a federal judge in the D.C. Circuit almost single-handedly started turning the judicial tide against the "red scare" generated by Senator Joseph McCarthy and others, according to a panel presented by the Historical Society of the D.C. Circuit in May 2011.

One hundred students from ten Washington area high schools appeared in Federal Court on April 8, 2011 to argue cases before U.S. District Court judges. The students, practicing their litigation skills, were from 10 schools (Columbia Heights Education Campus, Coolidge, Idea PCS, Maret, McKinley Tech, National Cathedral, School Without Walls, St. Albans, Theodore Roosevelt, and H.D. Woodson) and presented their arguments to 11 judges.

Celebrating its 20th anniversary, the Historical Society presented a program at the D.C. Circuit's Judicial Conference on June 9, 2010. Panelists, all active participants in the Watergate drama, probed the conflicts, tensions and personalities of the individuals who, and institutions that, played a role in the Watergate events.

In the 1970's influential judges on the D.C. Circuit engaged in a well-publicized debate about the appropriate scope of judicial review of federal agency rulemaking.

In July 2009, Almost 200 people listened intently as Roger M. Adelman and William D. Nussbaum made closing arguments drawn directly from the transcripts of two of the Teapot Dome trials (United States v. Albert Fall and United States v. Edward Doheny), arguments that were actually made by defense counsel Frank Hogan and Special Prosecutor and future Supreme Court Justice Owen J.Roberts years ago.

The Hon. Patricia M. Wald, Hon. Timothy B. Dyk and Hon. Glen O. Robinson discussed the FCC indecency cases heard in the D.C. Circuit in a wide-ranging panel discussion on October 14, 2008. The panel was moderated by Christopher J. Wright, Esq. Mr. Wright, who previously served as General Counsel of the FCC and argued the Action for Children's Television case before the en banc D.C. Circuit in 1994, provided an overview of the FCC's indecency jurisprudence.

On July 31, 2008, the Historical Society sponsored "Technology in the Courtroom: Could it Change the Course of History?" The program explored the relative advantages and disadvantages of the use of technology to present evidence and arguments in a jury trial.

On November 29, 2007, the Historical Society of the D.C. Circuit presented a program on the role of the Courts of the District of Columbia Circuit in developing the law respecting the Freedom of Information Act ("FOIA") and national security.

On June 2, 1952, the Supreme Court decided in Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co., v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579, that President Truman's seizure of most of the nation's steel mills to avert a nation-wide strike of steelworkers and keep the mills operating during the Korean War was an unauthorized, unconstitutional executive action that could not stand. The steel companies presented their claims initially to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, which ruled against the Government on all points and issued a preliminary injunction.

Attorneys directly involved in the Pentagon Papers cases and law professors who have written about the cases talked with moderator Carl Stern about their experiences in a panel discussion sponsored by the Historical Society on November 30, 2006.

On July 26, 2006, the Historical Society staged a reenactment of the cross examination of a government witness from the Independent Counsel prosecution of former Secretary of Agriculture, Michael Espy. The Honorable James Robertson presided over this unique program and moderated a discussion among the participants afterward on the art of cross examination and the unusual challenges presented by the Espy trial.

On May 4, 2006, the Historical Society put on another in its series of panel discussions on historic cases that were heard in the D.C. Circuit Courts: The Landmark AT&T Divestiture Case and its Economic and Regulatory Repercussions.

Many of the highlights of the 200-year history of the Courts of the D.C. Circuit are revealed in an exhibition prepared by the Historical Society for the Courts. The exhibition was unveiled at the opening of the William B. Bryant Annex to the Courthouse and can be viewed in the Great Hall today.

On August 3, 2005, the D.C. Circuit Historical Society sponsored a program on oral advocacy. Moderated by former Chief Judge Patricia M. Wald, who heard arguments before the Court for 20 years, a panel of distinguished judges and oral advocates discussed how to present an effective oral argument and how oral advocacy before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has changed over time.

Nearly 30 years after the jury returned its 1973 verdict finding President Nixon's closest advisors guilty of obstruction of justice, the key participants in that historic trial came together in Nov 2004 for the first time since the trial to discuss its historic significance and the lessons learned.

In July 2004, Chief Judge Thomas F. Hogan, Judge Royce C. Lamberth, and Judge Joyce Hens Green of the District Court candidly discussed the special problems they have faced when handling high-profile civil and criminal cases over the years.

Following presentation of the tape of the argument he made in Mallory v. United States before the U.S. Supreme Court, District Judge William B. Bryant talked about his experiences in preparing for the argument and in its presentation.